A new bill passed by Rhode Island’s House of Representatives proposes that Rhode Island taxpayers fund abortion via healthcare plans that cover state workers, as well as through Medicaid.
The current state statute reads, “Rhode Island shall not include in any health insurance contracts, plans, or policies covering employees, any provision which shall provide coverage for induced abortions.” The Equality in Abortion Coverage Act (EACA), sponsored by Majority Whip Katherine Kazarian, would delete such wording in state law that prevents state funds from going towards abortions.
Whip Kazarian argued for the measure on the grounds that some people might not be able to pay for abortions – the most lucrative procedure for the abortion business Planned Parenthood – and therefore, the state should pay for them, under the guise of equality.
“While I am grateful that Rhode Island has codified Roe v. Wade into state law, access to reproductive health is still not equal in our state. Unless an individual is able to pay the costs out of pocket or is on private insurance, these essential health care services are still out of reach for too many Rhode Islanders. With reproductive rights remaining under attack in our nation’s capital, the passage of the Equality in Abortion Coverage Act will provide total equality for everyone in Rhode Island who needs reproductive health services access,” said Whip Kazarian according to Newport Buzz.
The debate around the measure was contentious, with several Democrats voting against the measure before it eventually passed 49-24. Rep. Charlene Lima, D-Cranston, was particularly vocal about the measure, despite describing herself as “pro-choice.” She stated her objections to constituents funding abortions they strongly morally oppose.
“It is fundamentally wrong to ask the taxpayers to pay for Medicaid abortions and abortion coverage under taxpayer funded state insurance plans … I plan to vote no,” Rep. Lima said, according to the Providence Journal. She rejected the notion that there is any other way to characterize the legislation. “The taxpayers who have a fundamental belief against abortion are going to have to pay for it. Don’t say the taxpayers aren’t going to pay for it, we know they are,” she said, according to WJAR.
In 2019, Rhode Island codified Roe into state law, allowing for abortions late into pregnancy. Additionally, Rep. Arthur Corvese stated that Rhode Island already pays for abortion in the cases of rape, incest, or the health of the mother — even though the intentional and direct killing of a preborn baby is not medically necessary and is not health care.
“Termination of pregnancy as a method of after-the-fact birth control is an abomination and unconscionable in a civilized society,” Rep. Corvese said.
Another piece of the debate was the funding for the measure. Rep. Lima raised concerns about how the state proposed to pay for said abortions. “Unless, speaker, you have a golden goose that lays a golden egg in your office, where’s this money going to come from?” She added, “It is so easy to spend money when it’s not yours. If the 50-something people on this floor want to pay for abortion … use your money, not the taxpayer’s money.”
Proponents of the bill argued that taxpayers opposed to the Vietnam War were still required to pay taxes to support the war effort.
“Not so long ago, even the proponents of legal abortion regarded it as an unfortunate but necessary evil,” recalled R.I. Right to Life lobbyist Barth Bracy, according to the Providence Journal. “Now, the state-paid killing of underprivileged preborn human children is bizarrely proposed as a matter of ‘economic justice’ and, simultaneously, as a way for the state to save money. I pray that each one of you will pause to consider the role you yourself play in this grotesque and degenerate state-of-affairs. For you to advance this bill is actually worse than using your own credit card to pay for these abortions because you are using money forcibly taken from people who deeply object to these killings.”
There is no timeline for when the Senate will take up its version of the bill, but it is expected to pass there as well.
